From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/3] x2APIC improvement Date: Wed, 7 Jul 2010 09:56:57 -0400 Message-ID: <20100707135656.GD4823@phenom.dumpdata.com> References: <1A42CE6F5F474C41B63392A5F80372B21F67B00E@shsmsx501.ccr.corp.intel.com> <20100706144915.GB5408@phenom.dumpdata.com> <4C340BF4.0@intel.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <4C340BF4.0@intel.com> List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xensource.com Errors-To: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xensource.com To: Weidong Han Cc: Xen-devel , Keir Fraser List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org On Wed, Jul 07, 2010 at 01:09:08PM +0800, Weidong Han wrote: > Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk wrote: > >On Mon, Jul 05, 2010 at 03:07:58PM +0800, Han, Weidong wrote: > >>The patchset improves Xen x2APIC support. > >> > >>Patch 1/3: allocate iommu when create a drhd > >> A drhd is created when parse ACPI DMAR table, but drhd->iommu is not allocated until iommu setup. But iommu is needed by x2APIC which will enable interrupt remapping before iommu setup. This patch allocates iommu when create drhd. And then drhd->ecap can be removed because it's the same as iommu->ecap. > >> > > > >Have these patches been tested on a machine where the number of DRHD != > >number of IOAPICs? > > > Why need to care about number of DRHD != number of IOAPICs? One DRHD > may cover more than one IOAPICs. And there is already check if all And the inverse might be true as well - in which case we should disable x2APIC. > IOAPICs have corresponding DRHD. I understand. I am asking whether these patches have not changed that behavior and whether you have tested for that.